Philadelphia Daily News August 20, 2003
Questions arise from rubble of blasts
At least 38 people killed in Baghdad, Jerusalem
Q It's been well over three months since Bush declared that "the battle of Iraq was one victory" in the larger war on terrorism. How come it doesn't feel that way?
A Probably because almost as many American solidiers have died in Iraq since "the end of major combat" on May 1 - 131, including 61 in direct combat - as the number of pre-May 1 U.S. fatalities, 138. And the post-May 1 number doesn't include the 20 people killed in yesterday's blast or the victims of the recent car bombing of the Jordanian Embassy.
Most experts say now that the war didn't end when Saddam's statue was toppled in April or when "major combat" ended in May - but instead the method of fighting changed a lot.
"I would call it a low-level insurgency," said Stephen Zunes, the University of San Francisco professor who wrote "Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism."
"But it could become increasingly high-level in the months ahead."
Q Who did this?
A Nobody stepped forward to claim responsibility for the Baghdad blast. But most observers of the Middle East say that large-scale bombings of the Jordanian Embassy and now the U.N. headquarters do not appear to be the work of Saddam Hussein's die-hard followers from the Ba'ath Party.
Instead, the attacks on so-called "soft" - i.e., nonmilitary - targets carry all the earmarks of Islamic extremists, if not actual members of Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network. It now appears that anti-U.S. fighters are flocking to Iraq in the same way that Muslims from around the globe were recruited to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Some experts say the overwhelming majority of foreign terrorists entering Iraq are from Saudi Arabia.
"It's wrong to characterize the resistance as the crumbling and die-hard remnants of the Ba'ath regime," said Ian Lustick, a University of Pennsylvania professor and Middle East expert.
"This looks like the doing of an al Qaeda-type operation that's recruiting outside of Iraq, as well as inside."
Said John Pike of globalsecurity.org, "It's a big country with a long border and a lot of people who want payback, and we've given them a front-row opportunity."
Last night, a senior U.S. defense official said it's possible that a terrorist group called Ansar al-Islam, which operated in northern Iraq and has loose ties with al Qaeda, was behind both major Baghdad bombings, although he added: "We don't know who did it."
Q What's the U.N. doing in Iraq, anyway? I thought the U.N. wanted no part of what's been going on over there?
A While the U.N. Security Council was unwilling to approve the military invasion by the United States and Britain, the larger body still wants to play a role in providing humanitarian aid, such as food and medicine to the Iraqi people.
Although most experts say the U.N. mission in Iraq was ill-defined, it had been developing programs aimed at boosting Iraq's emerging free press and justice system, and monitoring human rights. A recent Security Council resolution "welcomed" the 25-member U.S.-picked governing council of Iraqis.
Q Why attack the U.N. when the terrorists are really angry at the Americans?
A There are several reasons. As the U.N. slowly stepped up its role in Iraq, opponents of the U.S. occupation and the post-Saddam reconstruction are likely to lash out at anyone who is seen as aiding in that effort. The growing impression that the American presence has brought nothing but chaos to Iraq is likely to fuel anti-U.S. sentiments - thwarting the campaign to win over the "hearts and minds" of average citizens.
Some experts note that although no definitive link to al Qaeda has been established, the bin Laden-backed group has long been hostile to the U.N. and its role in Afghanistan, Israel and elsewhere. But the biggest reason that terrorists attacked the U.N. building was simply because they could.
Although direct attacks on American troops have inflicted some casualties, terrorists can get much higher body counts by going after a lightly defended soft target like the U.N. office.
Q In that case, why wasn't the U.N. facility heavily guarded by armed troops?
A U.N. officials decided to forgo strict security measures because they "did not want a large American presence outside," U.N. spokesman Salim Lone said. Coalition military forces did patrol the neighborhood, however.
"We are unarmed. We don't have a lot of security, as this bomb shows," Lone told CNN yesterday. "We don't want a lot of security, because we're here to help the people of Iraq."
Q Aren't some level of terrorist or guerrilla-style attacks against an occupying army normal? Didn't that happen in Germany after World War II?
A You are thinking of the "werewolves," a band of former German SS troopers who blew up waterworks and power plants, plundered art museums and killed American sympathizers - sound familiar? - as late as 1947 before petering out.
But experts note that the addition of foreign fighters in Iraq is a thorny problem that didn't exist in postwar Germany.
Q It was jarring to hear of the Jerusalem bus bombing so shortly after the explosion in downtown Baghdad. Any connection between the two?
A Highly doubtful. Hamas and Islamic Jihad - two groups that have focused on the Palestinian situation and have no involvement in Iraq - both claimed responsibility for the bus blast.
Last week, Islamic Jihad threatened attacks on Israelis to avenge the killing of a senior operative, Mohammed Sidr, in an Israeli arrest raid in the West Bank city of Hebron.
The only link is a symbolic one. The U.S. invasion of Iraq was supposed to bring calm to Iraq and also improve the prospect of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians - two events that yesterday seemed a long, long way off.
Q You mentioned John Ashcroft earlier. I understand that he's coming to Philly.
A Yes. He's speaking this morning at the National Constitution Center to an invited audience of law-enforcement officials. It's a good bet his talk will not be called, "How America Is Winning the War on Terror."
© Copyright 2003, Philadelphia Daily News
